THE CONTENTS OF THIS NUMBER.
Agriculture—Dew and Soil Moisture, Page [17]; Specialty in Farming, [17]; Public Squares in Small Cities, [17-18]; Farm Names, [18]; Diogenes In His Tub, [18]; Field and Furrow, [18-19]; Agricultural Organizations, [19]; Didn't No. 38 Die Hard, [19]; A Grange Temple, [19].
Live Stock—Items, Page [20]; Swine Statistics, [20]; Iowa Stock Breeders, [20]; The Horse and His Treatment, [20]; Items, [20-21].
The Dairy—Winter Feed for Cows, Page [21]; Churning Temperature, [21]; Seas of Milk, [21].
Veterinary—About Soundness, Page [21]; Questions Answered, [21].
Horticulture—The Hedge Question, Page [22]; Young Men Wanted, [22]; Possibilities of Iowa Cherry Growing, [22-23]; Prunings, [23].
Floriculture—Gleanings by an Old Florist, Page [23].
Editorial—Items, Page [24]; Illinois State Board, [24-25]; Sorghum at Washington, [25]; The Cold Spell, [25]; American Ash, [25]; Wayside Notes, [25]; Letter from Champaign, [25].
Poultry Notes—A Duck Farm, Page [26].
The Apiary—Apiary Appliances, Page [26]; What Should be Worked For, [26].
Scientific—The Star of Bethlehem, Page [27].
Household—How the Robin Came, Poem, Page [28]; After Twenty Years, [28]; Will Readers Try It, [28]; The Secret of Longevity, [28]; How the Inventor Plagues His Wife, [28]; Recipes, [28]; Pamphlets, etc., Received, [28].
Young Folks—The City Cat, Poem, Page [29]; Amusing Tricks, [29]; Bright Sayings, [29]; Compiled Correspondence, [29].
Literature—The Wrong Pew, Poem, Page [30]; Yik Kee, [30-31].
Humorous—"A Leedle Mistakes," Page [31]; Sharper Than a Razor, [31]; A Coming Dividend, [31].
News of the Week—Page [31].
Markets—Page [32].
Dew and Soil Moisture.
Bulletin No. 6 of Missouri Agricultural College Farm is devoted to an account of experiments intended to demonstrate the relation of dew to soil moisture. Prof. Sanborn has prosecuted his work with that patience and faithfulness characteristic of him, and the result is of a most interesting and useful nature.
The Professor begins by saying that many works on physics, directly or by implication, assert that the soil, by a well-known physical law, gains moisture from the air by night. One author says "Cultivated soils, on the contrary (being loose and porous), very freely radiate by night the heat which they absorb by day; in consequence of which they are much cooled down and plentifully condense the vapor of air into dew." Not all scientific works, however, make this incautious application of the fact that dew results from the condensation of moisture of the air in contact with cooler bodies. Farmers have quite universally accepted the view quoted, and believe that soils gain moisture by night from the air. This gain is considered of very great importance in periods of droughts, and is used in arguments favoring certain methods of tillage.
Professor Stockbridge, in 1879, at the Massachusetts Agricultural College, carried on very valuable and full experiments in test of this general belief, and arrived at results contradictory of this belief. He found, in a multitude of tests, that in every instance, save one, for the months from May to November, that the surface soil from one to five inches deep, was warmer than the air instead of cooler, as the law requires for condensation of moisture from the air. That exception was in the center of a dense forest, under peculiar atmospheric conditions. After noting these facts, ingenious methods were employed to test more directly the proposition that soil gains moisture from the air by night, with the result that he announced that soils lose moisture by night. Professor Stockbridge's efforts met with some criticism, and his conclusions did not receive the wide acceptance that his view of the question justifies. In reasoning from observation, Professor Stockbridge noted that the bottom of a heap of hay, during harvesting, would be wet in the morning, the under side of a board wet in the morning, and so of the other objects named. In the progress of tillage experiments related in his Bulletins Nos. 3 and 5, Prof. Sanborn's attention was again called to this question, resulting in the prosecution of direct tests of the soil moisture itself. When completed it is thought that there will then no longer be occasion to reason from assumed premises regarding the matter. The trials were begun late, and under disadvantages; and are to be understood as preliminary to more complete tests during 1884. The experiments were all conducted upon a soil bare of vegetation.
Prof. Sanborn concludes from his experiments thus far that the surface gains moisture from soil beneath it by capillary action, but gathers nothing from the air. This is made strongly probable, if not shown; first, because the soil is warmer by night than the air. (He relies upon other facts than his own for this assertion.) 2nd. Because he found more moisture in the soil when covered over night than when left bare. 3d. Because when hoed, thereby disturbing capillary action, he found less moisture than when unhoed, in surface soil. Finally, he concludes the position proven, for, when he shut off the upward flow of water to the surface of the soil, he found not only less moisture above the cut off or in the surface soil than where no disturbance of capillary action had been made, but actually less moisture in the surface soil than the night before. Strongly corroborating this conclusion is the fact that all of the tests conspire to show that the gain of moisture in the surface of the soil by night is traceable to one source, and only one source.
American Ash.—See Page [25].
The facts of this bulletin accord with the previous ones in showing that mulching and frequent shallow tillage economize the moisture of the soil and add new proof of this to those already given.
Specialty in Farming.
This subject in my estimation should begin to attract attention, especially among the large land owners and farmers of the West. If we study the whole catalogue of money-making enterprises and money-making men, we find that the greatest success has been attained where there has been the greatest concentration on a special line of work. True, it is, that specialists are subject to unexpected changes of the times, and if thrown out of their employment are not well prepared for other work, and yet their chances for success as compared with the "general idea" man are as ten to one.
For an example look at science. How has it advanced? Is it not by the invaluable aid of men who have given their whole lives to the solution of some special problem? It could not be otherwise. If every scientist had attempted to master the majority of scientific truths before he was contented to concentrate his time on some special branch of science, science would have progressed little or none at all. Linnæus opened the way in botany, and the world profited by his blunders. But to be brief—it seems to me that the most successful farmer in the future is to be the man who can so arrange his work that he is led into the deepest research on some one branch of farming. He must be a specialist. He must thoroughly master the raising of fine stock for breeding purposes, for practical profit and the shambles. Attend stock associations, and hear witnesses testify on every hand to the difficulties connected with properly rearing calves for breeding purposes.
The honest breeder, though full of ideas, acknowledges he knows but very little on breeding. His time in farm life, for twenty years or more has been devoted to too many things. Is not the expert swine-grower the successful man? Books are something, but practical experience is something more. It matters little however practical the author of a work on agricultural science may be, unless the man who reads has some practical experience, his application of the author's truths will be a total failure.
We insist, therefore, that the successful farmer must be a specialist. He must devote his time to special more than to general farm work. You ask me to outline in detail the idea thus advanced. You somewhat question its practicability. To attempt it might lead to endless discussion, but let us reduce to example. Farmer A. raises cattle, hogs, and sheep for breeding purposes, devotes some attention to fine horses, and keeps thirty-six cows for dairy purposes. Farmer B. devotes his entire attention to dairying and has invested in dairy cows as much money as A. has in all his stock. Is it not evident that though each farmer began life the same year, the latter man will make the most money, providing the section he is in demands dairy work? It seems to me so. And if we further place limit on the dairyman's work, we should say he can not afford, with fifty or seventy-five cows, to give as much attention to the manufacture of cheese and butter as that work necessarily demands. Even though he employs a specialist in creamery work, he himself must be a specialist to some extent. We say to investing farmers do not put $500 into horses, $500 into fine cattle, and $500 into swine, but concentrate on one class of stock, and give that your time.
J.N. Muncey,
Asst. Ag. Expts. Ag. Col., Ames, Iowa.
Public Squares in Small Cities.
BY H.W.S. CLEVELAND.
A respectable looking, middle-aged gentleman called upon me not long since and told me he was a resident of an interior city of some eight or ten thousand inhabitants, and at a recent public meeting had been appointed chairman of a committee on the improvement of a small park, which it was thought might be made an attractive ornamental feature of the town.
On further inquiry I learned that the proposed park was simply a public square with a street on each of its four sides, on which fronted the principal public buildings, stores, etc. It was a dead level, with no natural features of any kind to suggest the manner of its arrangement, but they thought it might be made to add to the beauty of the town, and he had called to ask my advice in regard to it.
As the arrangement of such areas had occupied my thoughts a good deal in a general way, it occurred to me that this was a good opportunity to ventilate some opinions I had formed in regard to prevalent errors in their management, and accordingly I addressed him substantially as follows:
"It is very rare that the people of any town show a just appreciation of the value of such an area for ornamental use. Such a piece of ground as you describe in the very business center of a town must of course possess great pecuniary value, and the fact that it has been voluntarily given up and devoted for all time to purposes of recreation and ornament would lead us to expect that they would at least exercise the same shrewdness in securing their money's worth, that they do in their private transactions. They have given this valuable tract for the object of ornamenting the town by relieving the artificial character of the buildings and streets by the refreshing verdure of trees and grass and shrubbery, and that it may afford a place for rest and recreation for tired wayfarers and laborers, and nurses with their children, and a pleasant resort for rest and refreshment when the labors of the day are at an end.
"Its arrangement, therefore, should be such as to set forth these objects so obviously that no one could look upon the scene without perceiving it. The trees should be so arranged in groups and in such varieties as would afford picturesque effects when seen from the principal points of approach. The paths and open areas should be so arranged as to prevent the possibility of saving time by a short cut across, and so provided with seats under the shade of the trees as to invite to repose, instead of this, in nine cases out of ten, the trees (if any are planted) are simply set in rows at equal distances, without the faintest attempt at picturesque effect, and the paths are carried diagonally across from corner to corner for the express purpose of affording an opportunity for a short-cut to every one who is hastening to or from his business. The consequence is that at certain hours the paths are filled by a hurrying throng whose presence would alone suffice to banish the effect of repose which should be the ruling spirit of the place, while at all other times it is comparatively deserted.
"Perhaps these ideas might not be satisfactory to your people, and I have therefore set them forth somewhat at length in order that you may understand what I conceive should be the ruling principle of arrangement."
I perceived that my visitor was somewhat disturbed and it was not till he had told me, in a kind of half apologetic way, that he did not know "but what I was pretty nigh right," that he finally informed me that the square in question was already divided in the manner I described, by diagonal paths, and moreover that the paths were lined on each side by rows of well-grown trees.
I could not help inquiring what further laying out it required, and it then came out that there had been no thought of a re-arrangement of the component elements of the park in order to give it an expression of grace or beauty, but they had thought I might be able to make it attractive by the introduction of rustic arbors and gateways, or perhaps a fountain or "something of that sort to give it a stylish look."
I gave him an advertising pamphlet containing designs and prices of garden ornaments, and told him they could select and order whatever they liked from the manufacturers,—but declined to give any advice which should connect my name with the work.
I have told this story as the readiest means of setting forth my ideas of the capabilities of such public areas, and also as an illustration of prevailing errors in regard to landscape gardening, which most people seem to think consists solely of extraneous, artificial decoration, by means of which any piece of ground can be made beautiful, however stiff and formal may be the arrangement of the trees, shrubbery, and lawns which give expression to its character as truly as the features of a human face.
Such squares as I have described are the most common and simple forms of public parks, and they might and should in all cases constitute not only a chief ornament of the town, but a most attractive place of resort for rest and refreshment. Nothing beyond the materials which nature furnishes is needed for the purpose, but it is essential that these should be gracefully dispersed, and that they should exhibit a luxuriant, healthy growth.
Above all we should avoid the introduction of artificial decorations which are intended to "look pretty." If arbors or rests are needed, let them be placed at the points where they are obviously required, and be made of graceful patterns; but do not put elaborate structures of rustic work where no one will ever use them, and where in a few years they will be only dilapidated monuments of a futile effort at display.
The Village Improvement Societies which are everywhere springing up should devote their earliest efforts to the tasteful arrangement and care of these public ornamental areas, which should form the nucleus and pattern of the graceful expression which should pervade the streets.
Farm Names.
Since the call of The Prairie Farmer for "something new" I have been afraid to follow any of the old beaten paths so long traveled by agricultural writers; and have been on the lookout for the "something new." Something that does not appear in our agricultural papers, yet of interest to the fraternity. It matters little how trifling the subject may be, if it begets an interest in farm or country life; anything that will make our homes more attractive, more beautiful, and leave a lasting impression on the minds of the boys and girls that now cluster around the farmers' hearths throughout this vast country of ours.
There is a beautiful little song entitled, "What is Home Without a Mother?" which could be supplemented with another of equal interest, to wit: "What is Home Without a Name?" I answer, a dreary waste of field and fence, there being nothing in the mind of the absent one to remind him of his distant home but a lone farm-house, a barn, long lines of fences, and perhaps a few stunted apple trees; and when he thinks of it, his whole mind reverts to the hot harvest field, the sweat, the toil, and the tiresomeness of working those big fields! Nothing attractive, no pleasant memory. Nothing to draw the mind of the youth to the roof that sheltered his childhood. No wonder boys and girls yearn for a change.
Then what are we to do to change this for the better. I say give your country homes a name, no matter how homely or isolated that home may be. Give each one a name, and let those names be appropriate and musical, short, sweet, and easily remembered and pronounced, and then, when you go to visit a neighbor, either on business or pleasure, instead of saying, I am going to Jones', or to Brown's, or Smith's, let it be, I am going over to "The Cedars," or, to "Hickory Grove," or, to "Holly Hill." How much pleasanter it would sound. There would be no mistake about your destination, there being perhaps half a dozen Jones, Browns, or Smiths within five miles of your home, but only one "Hickory Hill." Then, when young folks make up their surprise parties during the long, cold, winter evenings, in place of notifying each other that they are going to surprise the James', the Jones', or the Jackson's, it would be, we are going to surprise "Pleasant Valley" "Viewfield" or "Walnut Hill." Every member of the surprise party would know the place intended, and the squads and companies of sleighs with their closely packed loads of laughing girls, and well filled baskets of good things would begin to marshal on the several roads that lead towards the trysting place; and when the merry-makers reach the well trimmed walnut grove from which the farm takes its name, and march up to the dwelling, instead of shouting: Mrs. Brown, we greet you, or Uncle Brown, etc., it would be: "Walnut Hill" we greet you, which would include all the Browns, old and young.
One of the brightest spots in my memory is the remembrance of "Rose Valley" my childhood's happy home. Every pleasant occurrence of my boyhood clusters around that never-to-be forgotten name. It has acted like a guide, a land mark for me through my life; and my great aim in life has been to make my own home just like dear "Rose Valley." To begin the work, I have set my own house in order; and the following names given to the farms under my care will practically illustrate my plan.
| Former owners. | Farm names. | Present tenants. | |
| Thompson | Place | Hickory Ridge | A. Maddox |
| Home | " | Elmwood | Mr. Houck's home |
| Doutey | " | South Elmwood | D.Q. Renfrue |
| Horroll | " | Gravel Hill | T.H. Miller |
| Conran | " | Cedar Grove | A. Miller |
| Casebolt | " | Millbrook | C. Blettner |
| Harness | " | Burnside | A. Tunge |
| Heller | " | Pleasant Hill | J.H. Kempf |
| Lewis | " | Woodlawn | W. Lewis |
| Oaks' | " | Castle Rock | Noah Neff |
| Held | " | The Glade | W. Reubelman |
| Jackson | " | Beechwald | G. Edwards |
| Bottom | " | Deerfield | . . . . . . . . . . . . |
| Benna | " | The Mound | R. Oliver |
| Williams | " | Blacklands | W. Mitchel |
| McGee | " | Lone Tree | Tom Miller |
| Johnson | " | South Park | Owen Bush |
| New Land | Cedar Cliff | Peter Heller | |
| " " | Cypress Grove | Geo. Surlett | |
| Old Homestead | Middle Park | Johd Meintz | |
| West of City | West Park | Dave Meintz | |
| East of R. By. | Spring Park | Jas. Ballinger | |
| Manning Place | Longview | Aug. Klemme | |
| Cox | " | Meadow Hill | H. Stinehoff |
| Davis | " | Lilypond | Chas. Davis |
| Renfroe | " | Beechfield | I. Renfroe |
| Ruble | " | Sycamore Springs | Mrs. Sarah Miller |
| Bair | Clover Hill | W. Gunter | |
| Edmonson | " | Riverside | J.H. Relley |
| New | " | Cotton Grove | W.H. Henson |
| Garaghty | " | Wheatland | J.H. Relley |
| Price | " | Roundpond | W. Miller |
| Jordan | " | Parsonage | Wm. Jackson |
| Bird | " | Richwood | Mrs. Jackson |
| Laseley | " | Richland | W. Lackey |
| New | " | Lakeside | D. Edmunson |
| New | " | The Island | Geo. Laseley |
| Sexton | " | Beech Hill | J.H. Irving |
| Martin | " | Creekfield | Joe Bair |
| Miss Co | " | Catalpa Grove | Geo. Burns |
| Cramer | " | Hubbleside | . . . . . . . . . . . . |
| Miller | " | Spring Grove | A. Miller |
| Brown | " | East Gravel Hill | J.H. Miller |
I give these as samples to guide my brother farmers in selecting names for their homes. Every one of those farms can be identified by some local peculiarity, prominent and visible. For instance, Davis place is situated close to a large pond covered with white lilies. Standing on the doorsteps of the Manning place you can view a ten-mile stretch of the Mississippi river, while Mr. Relley's place is situated on the banks of that great stream. Such names can be multiplied to an indefinite extent, and duplicated in each county.
If such names were generally in use, it would greatly assist postmasters in their difficult task of knowing which Smith or Brown was intended.
Now brother farmers, I have moved the adoption of appropriate names for every farm in the land; who will second the motion? Give your wives and daughters a chance to name the homestead, and my word for it, it will be both musical and appropriate. Let us give our children something pleasant to think of after they have left the dear old home. To afix the name, paint it on a large board and nail it over your front gate.
Alex Ross,
Cape Girardeau, Mo.
Diogenes in His Tub.
Allow me, Messrs. Editors, to give you notes of what I see, and hear, and learn, and cogitate, and endeavor to inculcate, from my snug little home in my Tub—will you not?
Well—having your assent, I begin by wishing you all—editors, correspondents, typos, and "devils"—a Happy New Year, and your excellent paper unlimited success in 1884, and a long life thereafter. Next, permit me to advert to the contents of some